President Donald Trump arrives to speak in the rose Garden that the White residence on Nov. 13.Evan Vucci / AP
President Donald Trump and also his allies have actually filed dozens the lawsuits throughout the country in an effort to contest the election results.

You are watching: How many lawsuits has trump settled


Most that them have actually been shot down or withdrawn, and no court has found even a solitary instance the fraud. That at the very least 57 situations to have actually been filed, including some not directly involving Trump however which can nonetheless influence his standing, at the very least 50 have actually been denied, dismissed, cleared up or withdrawn.


Trump has actually aggressively ramped up his allegations of election fraud in the weeks due to the fact that his projected loss, tweeting dozens that debunked theories. In spite of the Electoral College poll this week certifying Biden"s victory, Trump has still no conceded.

Just five situations remain energetic as that Dec. 17. Here is where things stand:

Pennsylvania

3rd U.S. Court the Appeals: In Bognet v. Boockvar, Republicans said that the extended mail-in ballot deadline challenged the constitution.

Status: Denied.

U.S. District Court, east District: In Barnette v. Lawrence, the GOP lawsuit claimed that Montgomery ar wrongly enabled mail-in voters the possibility to healing ballots.

Status: Dismissed.

U.S. Ar Court, east District: In trump card v. Philadelphia County board of Elections, the trump card campaign argued that there to be insufficient accessibility by observers.


U.S. District Court, middle District: In Pirkle v. Wolf, 4 voter plaintiffs generalized allegations that fraud, based upon complaints authorize by 3rd parties.

Status: Withdrawn.

Pennsylvania can be fried Court: In solution to the Canvass of Absentee and also Mail-in Ballots, Republicans insurance claim that Philadelphia walk not offer election observers enough access.

Status: Denied. The court reversed the petition permitting an appeal. The court rejected the trump card campaign"s insurance claim that mail-in ballots through minor flaws should be rejected.

Pennsylvania commonwealth Court: In Hamm v. Boockvar, Republicans claimed that the state wrongly permitted voters to cast provisional ballots come cure invalid mail ballots.

Status: Denied.

Pennsylvania republic Court: Northampton Republicans challenged notifications of votes the were canceled during prescreening.

Status: Withdrawn.

Pennsylvania commonwealth Court: In trumped v. Boockvar, the campaign challenged the three-day deadline expansion given come mail-in voters absent identification to it is provided proof that identification.

Status: Relief granted. The court discovered that the secretary that state had no authority to administer an extension. The secretary of state"s office has said the total variety of votes is most likely fewer than 100 statewide.

Court of usual Pleas, Bucks County: Both the Republican national Committee and also the Trump project challenged end 2,000 mail-in ballots.

Status: Denied.

Montgomery ar Court of common Pleas: In trumped v. Montgomery County board of Elections, the trump campaign and also the RNC challenged about 600 mail-in ballots the lacked voters" addresses.

Status: Withdrawn.

U.S. Can be fried Court: In Republican Party the Pennsylvania v. Boockvar, Republicans tested the prolonged mail-in ballot deadline.

Status: Active.

3rd Circuit Court that Appeals: In trumped v. Boockvar, the project is saying that different provisional ballot techniques violate same protection.

Status: Denied.A federal judge top top Saturday dismissed the fit in a scathing opinion: "This claim, like Frankenstein"s Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together," judge Matthew Brann wrote.The Trump project appealed the ruling previously this week, however their appeal to be denied. The judgment states the "calling an election unfair does not make that so."

Pennsylvania supreme Court: The Trump project appealed a Philadelphia County plank of poll decision to count five different categories of mail-in and also absentee ballots.

Status: Denied. The court is reviewing even if it is the state choice code allows curing part mail-in ballots by spreading provisional ballots.

Pennsylvania supreme Court: In Ziccarelli v. Allegheny County plank of Elections, Nicole Ziccarelli, a GOP legislative branch candidate, challenged 2,349 undated mail-in ballots.

Status: Denied.

Court of typical Pleas for Westmoreland County: Ziccarelli is also daunting a small variety of provisional ballots.

Status: Relief granted.

Pennsylvania supreme Court: In Kelly v. Pennsylvania, a group of Republicans, led by Rep. Mike Kelly, asserted that the state"s no-excuse mail ballot law violates the state constitution. They sought an stimulate blocking certification of many mail-in votes or the directs the state Assembly to choose the presidential electors.

Status: Denied. The U.S. Supreme Court refuse the plaintiffs" appeal.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania: Metcalfe v. Wolf, repeats insurance claims of voter fraud, alleging that countless illegal ballots to be cast and also that autumn boxes because that ballots were improperly allowed.

Status: Denied.

U.S. Can be fried Court: In Texas v. Pennsylvania et al., the state that Texas filed suit against Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and also Wisconsin alleging that fraud and also mistakes damaged the presidential choice in those states.


*

Michigan

U.S. Ar Court, west District: In Johnson/Stoddard v. Benson, 2 Trump pendant made generalised allegations of voter fraud.

Status: Withdrawn.

Michigan supreme Court: In Johnson v. Benson, two Trump pendant made generalized allegations of voter fraud.

Status: Denied. In a 4-3 decision, the Michigan supreme Court refuse relief.

U.S. Ar Court, western District: In trump card v. Benson, the project claimed the Wayne county denied election challengers proper accessibility to watch election workers take care of ballots.

Status: Withdrawn

Wayne county Circuit Court: In Constantino v. Detroit, two Republican poll challengers alleged person that is abnormal in the vote at the TCF Center.

Status: Denied.

Wayne ar Circuit Court: In Stoddard v. Detroit, the plaintiffs declared that ballots to be improperly replicated by democratic Party inspectors.

Status: Denied.

Michigan Court the Claims: In trump card v. Benson, the project sought come have much more poll observers clock the vote count.

Status: Denied. In she opinion, referee Cynthia D. Stephens stated that the case was "inadmissible hearsay in ~ hearsay."

U.S. District Court, western District: In Bally v. Whitmer, a group of voters questioned election results in three counties based upon allegations of poll irregularities and also fraud.

Status: Withdrawn.

U.S. District Court, eastern District: In King v. Whitmer, a team of Michigan republicans asked a commonwealth judge to turning back Biden"s win in Michigan, result that was formally certified previously this month.

Status: Denied.

Wisconsin

U.S. District Court, east District: In Langenhorst v. Pecore, republic made generalized allegations the voter fraud that relied ~ above third-party accounts.

Status: Dismissed.

Wisconsin can be fried Court: In Wisconsin voters Alliance v. Wisconsin election Commission, a conservative group claims that the 5 cities that Kenosha, eco-friendly Bay, Madison, Milwaukee and also Racine illegally welcomed grants from on facebook CEO, mark Zuckerburg to boost election systems. They likewise claim that officials fail to acquire voter to know for some mail-in ballots.

Status: Denied.

U.S. Ar Court, east District: In Feehan v. Wisconsin elections Commission, previous Trump lawyer Sidney Powell is alleging fraud through voting machines.

Status: Dismissed.

Wisconsin can be fried Court: In trump card v. Evers, the Trump project seeks to invalidate mail ballots it cases were improperly contained during the canvas in Milwaukee and also Dane counties.

Status: Denied.

Wisconsin can be fried Court: In Mueller v. Wisconsin, the lawsuit insurance claims drop crate were put without suitable authority and seeks nullification of any kind of ballots placed in them. That accuses homeland Security"s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security firm of leading a propaganda project to encourage your use, part of a "treacherous procedure to interfere through the presidential election."

Status: Denied.

U.S. District Court, east District: In trump card v. Wisconsin elections Commission, the Trump campaign claims the state election officials made ballots and also drop boxes available in a manner not allowed by the state legislature.

Status: Dismissed.

Arizona

Maricopa County premium Court: In Arizona Republican Party v. Fontes, the republicans sought a hand recount the the ballots actors in Maricopa ar by precinct. The GOP does not allege fraud, yet it cases that the audit that votes go not fulfill state law.

Status: Dismissed.

Maricopa County exceptional Court: In trump v. Hobbs, the Trump project claimed that using Sharpies to fill in mail-in ballots resulted in an overvote and invalidated ballots.

Status: Dismissed.

Superior Court for the State the Arizona: In Ward v. Jackson, Kelli Ward, the chair the the Arizona Republican Party and a trumped elector, alleges misconduct in the elections management and seeks that the vote certification through Gov. Doug Ducey be annulled.

Status: Denied.

U.S. District Court: In Bowyer v. Ducey, involves Texas lawyer Sidney Powell and also alleges "massive election fraud" involving dominion voting systems. These cases are comparable to those in various other lawsuits.

Status: Denied. The plaintiffs filed one appeal.

Superior Court because that the State that Arizona: In Stevenson v. Ducey, the plaintiffs challenged the election results.

Status: Dismissed voluntarily.

Arizona exceptional Court: In Burk v. Ducey, the plaintiffs claim illegal ballots to be counted in the vote totals, while attacking the use of rule voting machines.

Status: Active.

Nevada

Clark County district Court: In choice Integrity job v. Nevada, the plaintiffs claimed that Nevada"s vote-by-mail framework is unconstitutional. The suit was filed in September.

Status: Denied.

1st Judicial ar Court, Carson City: In legislation v. Whitmer, Trump"s six electors asserted irregularities, consisting of the improper use of scanning devices to verify signatures.

Status: Denied.

U.S. District Court: In Stokke v. Cegavske, the plaintiffs search to protect against the usage of automatically signature equivalent in Clark County.

Status: Withdrawn.

Nevada supreme Court: In Kraus v. Cegavske, the trumped campaign, the Nevada GOP and also a Republican voter and also count-watcher called Fred Kraus sue to prevent the usage of automated signature matching.

Status: Dismissed. The parties reached an agreement to permit for much more observers.

Clark County district Court: In Becker v. Gloria, April Becker, a state Senate candidate, tested the use of automated solution to enhance mail-in ballot signatures and also the mail of ballots to all registered voters.

Status: Denied.

Clark County ar Court: In Marchant v. Gloria, Jim Marchant, a congressional candidate, challenged the use of automated systems for signature-matching and for e-mail ballots to every registered voters.

Status: Dismissed.

Clark County ar Court: In Rodimer v. Gloria, Daniel Rodimer, a state legislature candidate, challenged the usage of automated equipment for signature-matching and mailing ballots to all registered voters.

Status: Dismissed.

Georgia

U.S. Ar Court, northern District: In lumber v. Raffensperger, an Atlanta lawyer and also Trump supporter sought one injunction to avoid a statewide canvass, suggesting that a consent decree mistakenly imposes one invalid procedure to verify voter signatures.


Status: Denied.

U.S. District Court, northern Division: Pearson v. Kemp makes plenty of of the cases alleged through Texas lawyer Sidney Powell, consisting of that voting devices made by ascendancy Voting Systems enabled Democratic officials come fraudulently add votes because that Biden.

Status: Dismissed. The plaintiffs intend to appeal.

Fulton County remarkable Court: In hardwood v. Raffensberger, a conservative team is behind a lawsuit claiming that countless illegal votes were counted and that funds contributed by mark Zuckerberg tainted the election. The suit seeks to invalidate the presidential election results.


Status: Denied.

Fulton County premium Court: In Boland v. Raffensperger, the plaintiff claims more than 20,000 ballots were actors by non-residents and also that counties did no properly screen mail ballot signatures. Seeks an audit or, if no one is granted, decertification the the choice results.

Status: Denied.

U.S. District Court, southern District: In Brooks v. Mahoney, 4 Republican voters claimed that a voting machine software glitch brought about a miscounting that votes.


Status: Dismissed.

Chatham County remarkable Court: The Georgia Republican Party and also the Trump project sought a reminder that mail-in ballots showing up late would not be counted.

Status: Dismissed.

Fulton County exceptional Court: Boland v. Raffensperger claims more than 20,000 ballots were cast by non-residents and that counties did not properly display screen mail ballot signatures. The complaint looks for an audit or, if none is granted, decertification the the election results.


Status: Denied.

Fulton County superior Court: In trump card v. Raffensperger, the trump campaign and also a trump card electorclaim thousand of ballots were actors by ineligible voters.

Status: Dismissed.

Minnesota

Minnesota supreme Court: In Kistner v. Simon, number of Republican candidates do generalized cases of vote irregularities. The sue sought come block the state"s certification of votes until an audit that the returns could be completed.


Status: Denied.

Minnesota ar Court, second Judicial District: In Quist v. Simon, the plaintiffs insurance claim the secretary of state created procedural alters that make the ballot counting process "overly broad, arbitrary, different and ad hoc."

Status: Active.

Minnesota district Court, 2nd Judicial District: In Jensen v. Simon, the plaintiffs look for to dispute election results under the insurance claim that invalid votes were counted.


Status: Active.

New Mexico

U.S. Ar Court: In trump v. Toulouse Oliver, the Trump project claims the secretary the state enabled ballot autumn boxes without legislative authority. The plaintiffs questioning the referee to void Biden"s elector certificate and also "remand to the state of brand-new Mexico legislative branch pursuant to appoint electors."

Status: Active.

See more: How Long Are Spicy Nuggets Back For A Limited Time, Mcdonald'S Spicy Chicken Mcnuggets Are Back


Pete Williams is one NBC News correspondent that covers the justice Department and also the can be fried Court, based in Washington.